Section Four of the First Chapter
On the Conditions of the Adhān
This section contains eight particular questions:
- Is it a condition that the one who gives the adhān must also pronounce the iqāmah, or not?
- Is it a condition of the adhān that the caller refrain from any other speech while calling, or not?
- Must the caller be in a state of ritual purity, or not?
- Must he face the qiblah, or not?
- Must he be standing, or not?
- Is it disliked (makrūh) for a person who is riding to give the adhān, or is it acceptable?
- Is puberty a condition for the caller, or not?
- Must he refrain from accepting payment for the adhān, or is it permissible for him to take wages?
Disagreement over the first issue—two men, one calling the adhān and the other giving the iqāmah—centres on two conflicting ḥadīths. The majority of jurists in the various regions regard the practice as valid, while some hold it impermissible.
The first ḥadīth is that of al-Ṣudāʾī. He said:
“I came to the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him. When dawn drew near he instructed me, so I gave the adhān. He then rose to pray, and Bilāl came to pronounce the iqāmah. The Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—said, ‘The brother of Sadāʾ has already given the call, and whoever gives the adhān is the one who should give the iqāmah.’”
The second ḥadīth relates that:
“When ʿAbd Allāh ibn Zayd was shown the adhān, the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—ordered Bilāl to call the adhān and then ordered ʿAbd Allāh to pronounce the iqāmah.”
Those who adopt the view of abrogation (naskh) say: the report of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Zayd is earlier, whereas the report of al-Ṣudāʾī is later and thus supersedes it.
Those who favour weighing the evidence (tarjīḥ) reply: the report of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Zayd is better authenticated, for the report of al-Ṣudāʾī is transmitted solely by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ziyād al-Ifriqī, whom they do not regard as a reliable authority.
As for the dispute over taking payment for the adhān, it hinges on the differing assessments of the ḥadīth in that regard—namely the report of ʿUthmān ibn Abī al-ʿĀṣ, who said:
“Among the last instructions the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—gave me was that I appoint a muʾadhdhin who does not take wages for his adhān.”
Those who forbid remuneration draw an analogy between the adhān and the prayer itself.
With respect to the remaining conditions, the root of the disagreement likewise turns on whether they should be analogised to the prayer: whoever extends the analogy imposes those conditions, and whoever does not, does not impose them.